PO-75 | Network meta-analysis comparing efficacy and safety outcomes of atogepant, rimegepant, and galcanezumab in patients with episodic migraine after including CHALLENGE-MIG Trial
Jessica Ailani,1 Pranav Gandhi,2 Anjana Lalla,2 Peter McAllister,3 Tanya Bilchik,4 Stephanie Nahas,5 David Rowe,6 Cristiano Piron,6 Kari Kelton,6 Raffaello Masselli*, Rashmi Halker Singh7 | 1MedStar Health, Washington DC, USA; 2AbbVie, North Chicago, IL, USA; 3New England Institute for Neurology and Headache, Stamford, CT USA; 4Department of Neurology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; 5Department of Neurology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA USA; 6Medical Decision Modeling Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA; 7Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA *Abbvie Srl, Rome, Italy. This individual has been added to this publication author by-line, with the permission of the original authors, for the express purpose of conducting the presentation at a local congress or in a local language. He did not contribute to the content of the publication.
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Authors
Background: Network meta-analysis of atogepant (Ato) relative to rimegepant (Rime) and galcanezumab (Galc) after inclusion of the CHALLENGE-MIG trial for efficacy and safety outcomes in episodic migraine (EM) patients.
Methods: The NMA included 5 randomized, controlled trials for the preventive treatment of EM (ADVANCE [Ato 60 mg], BHV3000-305 [Rime 75 mg], EVOLVE-1, EVOLVE-2 [Galc 120 mg], and CHALLENGE-MIG [Rime 75 mg, Galc 120 mg]). A fixed-effects model was chosen to compare the efficacy and safety of Ato versus Rime, Galc based on model fit statistics. Efficacy results at 12 weeks are presented as odds ratio (OR) or estimates of mean difference with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Safety results are presented as hazard ratio and 95% CI.
Results: After including CHALLENGE-MIG, the NMA showed Ato significantly increased the odds of achieving 50% RR in MMD compared to Rime (OR 2.29 (95% CI 1.43-3.66)), Galc (1.68 (1.07-2.64)), and placebo (Pbo) (3.80 (2.55-5.67)). Ato showed numerically higher MMD reductions compared to Rime and Galc, and significantly higher reductions compared to Pbo. Ato showed significantly greater reductions in acute medication use days compared to Rime and Pbo, and numerically greater reductions compared to Galc. Ato demonstrated significant improvement in Migraine Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 Role Function-Restrictive domain score compared to Rime and Pbo, and numerical improvement compared to Galc. Ato demonstrated numerically higher all-cause discontinuations (d/c) and numerically lower treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) compared to Rime, Galc, and Pbo; however, these differences were not significant.
Conclusion: Ato 60 mg demonstrated significant improvements in 3 of the 4 efficacy outcomes compared to Rime 75 mg and significantly increased odds of achieving ≥50% RR in MMD relative to Galc 120 mg. Other efficacy outcomes were not significantly different. Ato 60 mg demonstrated comparable all-cause d/c and TEAEs relative to Rime and Galc.
Downloads
Citations
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.